Author
Topic: This is just low. (Read 17227 times)

I commute by train a looong way for work (2.5 hours each way), and see a lot of things in this vein. Most commonly (i.e. happens every single trip at least once) is someone sitting in a bunch of seats, say 3, which are perpendicular to the wall with another such row in front. They will sit in the outer seat, perfectly blocking access to the two other empty seats. And this person will not move even as the train begins to fill up and people stand in the aisles. Other passengers sometimes ask the guilty person to move and let others sit down, but more often than not, the person will drape themselves over all the seats so unpleasantly that no-one would want to sit near them and standing actually looks more attractive.

One selfish person making an idiot of themselves to get two extra seats for free. Every single journey. Aaargh.

Although worse are the people who spill drinks/food everywhere around them and just leave as though they have no responsibility over the mess. They inconvenience many more people than the seat-hoggers.

I twisted my ankle not too long ago and though it's mainly healed, if I walk too much it can start to bother me again. I hate that premium spots are reserved for pregnant women. There are so many reasons why people (men included!) might need a closer spot.

So because there can't be reserved spots for every situayion, there shouldn't be any for anyone? I can't get behind that logic.

I think that Roe's point is that if those spots weren't reserved for pregnant women then everyone would have a fair shot at getting them. No, you wouldn't be guaranteed a spot, but at least you'd have a chance. The way it is now, some people always have the chance and others have none, even if they need it equally badly.

I twisted my ankle not too long ago and though it's mainly healed, if I walk too much it can start to bother me again. I hate that premium spots are reserved for pregnant women. There are so many reasons why people (men included!) might need a closer spot.

So because there can't be reserved spots for every situayion, there shouldn't be any for anyone? I can't get behind that logic.

I think that Roe's point is that if those spots weren't reserved for pregnant women then everyone would have a fair shot at getting them. No, you wouldn't be guaranteed a spot, but at least you'd have a chance. The way it is now, some people always have the chance and others have none, even if they need it equally badly.

Thank you MerryCat, that's it exactly.

But isn't this exactly like handicapped parking spots at stores? I have back and knee problems that are exacerbated by a long day at work- after an 8 hour shift, I really and truly can't walk more than 10-15 feet without wanting to cry- but I can't park in the first 5 spots of any row at Wal-Mart because they're for people with placards.

No, it isn't exaclty like handicapped parking - unless kids are a recognized handicap. Pregnancy would not be one either unless there are specific issues in which case one could get an actual handicapped parking placard.

I twisted my ankle not too long ago and though it's mainly healed, if I walk too much it can start to bother me again. I hate that premium spots are reserved for pregnant women. There are so many reasons why people (men included!) might need a closer spot.

So because there can't be reserved spots for every situayion, there shouldn't be any for anyone? I can't get behind that logic.

I think that Roe's point is that if those spots weren't reserved for pregnant women then everyone would have a fair shot at getting them. No, you wouldn't be guaranteed a spot, but at least you'd have a chance. The way it is now, some people always have the chance and others have none, even if they need it equally badly.

Thank you MerryCat, that's it exactly.

But isn't this exactly like handicapped parking spots at stores? I have back and knee problems that are exacerbated by a long day at work- after an 8 hour shift, I really and truly can't walk more than 10-15 feet without wanting to cry- but I can't park in the first 5 spots of any row at Wal-Mart because they're for people with placards.

What some of us are saying is that, in addition to the first few handicapped spots, sometimes you'll see the next couple of spots dedicated to pregnant women/parents with young children. If those spots were available for everyone then you could use them too, as could an elderly person, ill person, etc. Not that you can't use them now but you risk being glared at.

It's not that we begrudge a pregnant lady getting a good spot, it's that we don't feel it's right that pregnant/parents get dedicated spots because, like you said, many people have valid reasons for needing a close spot, too. Why should being pregnant trump having an injury, illness, arthritis, vertigo (been there!), etc?

I twisted my ankle not too long ago and though it's mainly healed, if I walk too much it can start to bother me again. I hate that premium spots are reserved for pregnant women. There are so many reasons why people (men included!) might need a closer spot.

So because there can't be reserved spots for every situayion, there shouldn't be any for anyone? I can't get behind that logic.

I think that Roe's point is that if those spots weren't reserved for pregnant women then everyone would have a fair shot at getting them. No, you wouldn't be guaranteed a spot, but at least you'd have a chance. The way it is now, some people always have the chance and others have none, even if they need it equally badly.

Thank you MerryCat, that's it exactly.

But isn't this exactly like handicapped parking spots at stores? I have back and knee problems that are exacerbated by a long day at work- after an 8 hour shift, I really and truly can't walk more than 10-15 feet without wanting to cry- but I can't park in the first 5 spots of any row at Wal-Mart because they're for people with placards.

What some of us are saying is that, in addition to the first few handicapped spots, sometimes you'll see the next couple of spots dedicated to pregnant women/parents with young children. If those spots were available for everyone then you could use them too, as could an elderly person, ill person, etc. Not that you can't use them now but you risk being glared at.

It's not that we begrudge a pregnant lady getting a good spot, it's that we don't feel it's right that pregnant/parents get dedicated spots because, like you said, many people have valid reasons for needing a close spot, too. Why should being pregnant trump having an injury, illness, arthritis, vertigo (been there!), etc?

I've never seen the ones for parents...that seems very odd. But these aren't legally enforced things, I think the store/business does them at their own discretion. I'm guessing the reason for pregnant spots as opposed to temporarily injured is because pregnancy is objective, where as if you say "Temporarily injured" it's open for more interpretation.

I feel like the mommy parking spots are a real hot topic on this board. I wonder why?

As a new time mom, I am extremely grateful for them. And of course men can use them too, my husband uses them when he goes shopping with our baby. That's the whole point of the spaces, because you have kids with you. The less distance they have to cross in a parking lot, which is a highly dangerous place for tiny tots, the better. And with a newborn, putting your cart back in the cradle is so much easier with the premium spots. Leaving your kid in the car, even for ten seconds, is really nerve racking. And I actually did not park in them at all while pregnant, I was still able to walk really well.

Back on topic, that's just an all new low. Pretending to be pregnant?

What I cannot stand though is thoughtlessness. We once got on the subway right after two girls... who sat down in the seats specially reserved for strollers. The rest of the tram was empty! They gave us a blank stare. We ended up parking the stroller next to them, and stood next to it the whole ride. Honestly? With an empty tram? Or parents who, on a packed subway, keep their toddler in an empty seat. Seriously, if the subway fills up, take the kid on your lap and give someone else a seat.

I agree on the toddlers, Although I once got on a train with no seats and saw a seat occupied by a toddler.... whose father offered me the kid's seat with the condition "If you don't mind him sitting on you. He likes pretty girls and he won't sit in my lap without a lot of screaming." I agreed to this... and got into a debate with a 3-5 year old over why Captain America would beat up Batman. For six train stops. (I wasn't ENTIRELY against this mind you.)

When riding with my BFF (who uses a wheelchair when we got on public transport) I've gotten nasty looks from people for sitting in the fold-down seat beside her chair. And one person coming right out and TELLING me "I don't care if you're a caretaker, you need to give that seat to me, I'm old and I deserve it."

Before I could say anything(and I had no idea what to say, I'm shy but not allowed to leave my friend.) BFF replied "She's young and has a fainting problem. You'd think if you're so old you'd have learned seats are first come, first served by now. Find. Another. Seat." (The car was mostly empty, and there were even seats just like the one I was in about five feet away.)

I feel like the mommy parking spots are a real hot topic on this board. I wonder why?

As a new time mom, I am extremely grateful for them. And of course men can use them too, my husband uses them when he goes shopping with our baby. That's the whole point of the spaces, because you have kids with you. The less distance they have to cross in a parking lot, which is a highly dangerous place for tiny tots, the better. And with a newborn, putting your cart back in the cradle is so much easier with the premium spots. Leaving your kid in the car, even for ten seconds, is really nerve racking. And I actually did not park in them at all while pregnant, I was still able to walk really well.

Back on topic, that's just an all new low. Pretending to be pregnant?

What I cannot stand though is thoughtlessness. We once got on the subway right after two girls... who sat down in the seats specially reserved for strollers. The rest of the tram was empty! They gave us a blank stare. We ended up parking the stroller next to them, and stood next to it the whole ride. Honestly? With an empty tram? Or parents who, on a packed subway, keep their toddler in an empty seat. Seriously, if the subway fills up, take the kid on your lap and give someone else a seat.

I agree on the toddlers, Although I once got on a train with no seats and saw a seat occupied by a toddler.... whose father offered me the kid's seat with the condition "If you don't mind him sitting on you. He likes pretty girls and he won't sit in my lap without a lot of screaming." I agreed to this... and got into a debate with a 3-5 year old over why Captain America would beat up Batman. For six train stops. (I wasn't ENTIRELY against this mind you.)

When riding with my BFF (who uses a wheelchair when we got on public transport) I've gotten nasty looks from people for sitting in the fold-down seat beside her chair. And one person coming right out and TELLING me "I don't care if you're a caretaker, you need to give that seat to me, I'm old and I deserve it."

Before I could say anything(and I had no idea what to say, I'm shy but not allowed to leave my friend.) BFF replied "She's young and has a fainting problem. You'd think if you're so old you'd have learned seats are first come, first served by now. Find. Another. Seat." (The car was mostly empty, and there were even seats just like the one I was in about five feet away.)

Hmm. Honestly if the kid was old enough to debate the ins and outs of superhero battles, I think he was old enough for his own seat. Me, I wouldn't want to have a strangers kid sit on me, but if you didn't mind then it works out.

I don't see any reason for seats to be specially reserved other than property owners desire, and being old and grumpy no more entitles you to a spot than being young and tired. It's a courtesy thing- it's nice to offer chairs to people who might need them more than you, it shouldn't be expected under every circumstance.

I twisted my ankle not too long ago and though it's mainly healed, if I walk too much it can start to bother me again. I hate that premium spots are reserved for pregnant women. There are so many reasons why people (men included!) might need a closer spot.

So because there can't be reserved spots for every situayion, there shouldn't be any for anyone? I can't get behind that logic.

I think that Roe's point is that if those spots weren't reserved for pregnant women then everyone would have a fair shot at getting them. No, you wouldn't be guaranteed a spot, but at least you'd have a chance. The way it is now, some people always have the chance and others have none, even if they need it equally badly.

Thank you MerryCat, that's it exactly.

But isn't this exactly like handicapped parking spots at stores? I have back and knee problems that are exacerbated by a long day at work- after an 8 hour shift, I really and truly can't walk more than 10-15 feet without wanting to cry- but I can't park in the first 5 spots of any row at Wal-Mart because they're for people with placards.

What some of us are saying is that, in addition to the first few handicapped spots, sometimes you'll see the next couple of spots dedicated to pregnant women/parents with young children. If those spots were available for everyone then you could use them too, as could an elderly person, ill person, etc. Not that you can't use them now but you risk being glared at.

It's not that we begrudge a pregnant lady getting a good spot, it's that we don't feel it's right that pregnant/parents get dedicated spots because, like you said, many people have valid reasons for needing a close spot, too. Why should being pregnant trump having an injury, illness, arthritis, vertigo (been there!), etc?

Marketing. There are certainly numerous reasons why someone wants to park in the closest spots, but I don't think businesses are coming at this from a need based perspective. Pregnancy is different from broken ankles/vertigo/arthritis because while it can cause physical discomfort, it's all packaged in a "warm and fuzzy" bundle. Pregnancy is common, it's visible and usually has a positive connotation to it. Our culture celebrates babies and pregnancy and some businesses are appealing to that quality when they designate these spots. It makes them look good and pro-family which in turn they hope leads to $$$$ from that customer base.

I'm certain that if stores received a deluge of backlash from the vertigo demographic about not having their own spots (or the miscellaneous injured demographic) and those complaining demographics were ones that typically brought in a lot of money to the business as well, that said business would change their parking strategy. They want money.

I just came back from a trip to Target and didn't see anything but the standard handicapped spots. I've lived in a number of major metro areas and the only time I see these pregnant/young children reserved spots are at places like Toys R Us or Babies R Us. It doesn't seem that pervasive and I currently live in Familyopolis where there would be a huge demographic for those spots.

But isn't this exactly like handicapped parking spots at stores? I have back and knee problems that are exacerbated by a long day at work- after an 8 hour shift, I really and truly can't walk more than 10-15 feet without wanting to cry- but I can't park in the first 5 spots of any row at Wal-Mart because they're for people with placards.

Wouldn't you qualify for a handicapped placard if you can't walk 15 feet? I may be wrong, but I think the standard for handicapped spots is not being able to walk 30 feet comfortably to get to the doors.

But isn't this exactly like handicapped parking spots at stores? I have back and knee problems that are exacerbated by a long day at work- after an 8 hour shift, I really and truly can't walk more than 10-15 feet without wanting to cry- but I can't park in the first 5 spots of any row at Wal-Mart because they're for people with placards.

Wouldn't you qualify for a handicapped placard if you can't walk 15 feet? I may be wrong, but I think the standard for handicapped spots is not being able to walk 30 feet comfortably to get to the doors.

I agree. I am, for the first time in my life, using a temp handicapped placard (I had a nasty ankle break in January, and I still can't walk on it). It is so weird parking in a handicapped spot. I still feel like I'm breaking the law somehow!

I got the temp permit from the local police dept, using a form I got at the doctor's office. I'd look into it. In a few months I won't need it - and will be very, very grateful!

The hospital has a premier parking spot marked, "For Clergy Only." I would think a patient would take precedence over someone visiting, even if the person visiting is "clergy." Why would that matter?

Probably because they need to get there in a hurry if somebody has called for them, and the hospital would rather they not waste their time circling the lot looking for a space when a dying person has asked for a final blessing. That's my guess, at least.

This.My dad was a minister and he parked in those spots (he had an official placard). He went to the hospital to visit church members several times a week.

Yes, but was he disabled in any way? That is, he could walk from any spot in the parking lot? So why get a special spot? Lots of people visit people in the hospital.

The hospital has a premier parking spot marked, "For Clergy Only." I would think a patient would take precedence over someone visiting, even if the person visiting is "clergy." Why would that matter?

Probably because they need to get there in a hurry if somebody has called for them, and the hospital would rather they not waste their time circling the lot looking for a space when a dying person has asked for a final blessing. That's my guess, at least.

This.My dad was a minister and he parked in those spots (he had an official placard). He went to the hospital to visit church members several times a week.

Yes, but was he disabled in any way? That is, he could walk from any spot in the parking lot? So why get a special spot? Lots of people visit people in the hospital.

I think the bolded is the answer to your questions. It's not about how able bodied the minister is, it's about expediting their access to the dying patient.

It doesn't sound like he was just using the spot for that reason though*, but for routine visits too.

*I still remember one shifts about 6 years ago when the hospital chaplain was in hospital himself having surgery on his feet, man in the bed opposite had a stroke and he/family wanted the last rites - which the chaplain performed in his pyjamas and slippers - was very surreal

The hospital has a premier parking spot marked, "For Clergy Only." I would think a patient would take precedence over someone visiting, even if the person visiting is "clergy." Why would that matter?

Probably because they need to get there in a hurry if somebody has called for them, and the hospital would rather they not waste their time circling the lot looking for a space when a dying person has asked for a final blessing. That's my guess, at least.

This.My dad was a minister and he parked in those spots (he had an official placard). He went to the hospital to visit church members several times a week.

Yes, but was he disabled in any way? That is, he could walk from any spot in the parking lot? So why get a special spot? Lots of people visit people in the hospital.

I think the bolded is the answer to your questions. It's not about how able bodied the minister is, it's about expediting their access to the dying patient.

Eh--I think the family and patient are more important but I guess I'm in the minority here.